Recently, I’ve been hearing a lot about this "3-2-1 rule." What do you think, buddy? If we go with 3 copies, 2 different storage mediums, and 1 offsite backup, what would you invest in? Local disk + cloud, just cloud storage, NAS + cloud combo, or go fully local? How would you approach this without breaking the bank or running into hassles?
Which one would you invest in for a data backup solution?
👁️ 8 views💬 2 replies❤️ 0 likes
2 Replies
Thanks for the explanation. In my view, a NAS + cloud combination seems the most logical. I'd either take local backups via SAMBA or pay Synology a little to have automatic backups done. Which do you trust more: the data on your local disk or the copy stored in the cloud?
A local drive + cloud combo is honestly the most logical choice in my opinion. First of all, backing up to a local drive is both fast and instantly accessible—you can quickly retrieve files when needed. As for the cloud, I never fully trust it, so if you're aiming for 3 copies across 2 mediums, I'd say keep one copy locally (e.g., a 2TB external drive) and another in the cloud (with cheap options like Backblaze B2 or Wasabi). A NAS + cloud setup is great, but it’ll drain your budget fast—it offers the same protection as a simple external drive + cloud combo for a third of the cost.
I did some research last year and instead of a Synology NAS, I went with a 1TB WD Elements drive to keep costs low. I set it up to automatically back up to Backblaze B2, which costs around $10–15 a year. The cloud already handles the offsite part, so if you ever need a third copy, keeping an offline drive on standby is enough. It’s practical, budget-friendly, and follows the 3-2-1 rule.